http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> 2011-11-17 21:49:44 UTC --- Created attachment 25846 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25846 potential second patch What I dont get is why HP PARISC doesn't have this same problem with __sync. __atomic isnt really used anywhere that __sync wasn't before, it simply supplements it. or is suppose to. If __sync doesn't have any issues, then the first patch when applied should resolve the HP PARISC issues, it should make all the __atomic library calls be CODE labels. If there is actually a __sync issue, the second patch does the same for both __atomic and __sync. I believe the secondary failures you have run across with __atomic_exchange_1 should be gone due to the implementation of __atomic_test_and_set and __atomic_clear which was checked in on Nov 10, but you'll have to let me know.
